- (1.) THESE two appeals have been preferred against the judgment passed by learned Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer in Sessions Case No.38/2008 whereby the learned Sessions Judge has acquitted the appellant Jetha Ram for the offences under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC but at the same time, the appellant Jetha Ram has been convicted for the offence under Section 306, IPC and he has been awarded seven years' rigorous imprisonment and a fine of Rs.5000/- and in default, he has to further undergo two years' simple imprisonment.
(2.) THE present petitioner has preferred appeal against the order of conviction and sentence for the offence under Section 306, IPC, whereas the State has preferred appeal against acquittal of Jetha Ram and others for the offence under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC. Both the appeals are arising out of the common judgment and hence both these appeals are being decided by this common judgment. Brief facts of the case are that on 8.6.2008 at about 10.40 p.m, a written report (Ex.P.l) has been submitted before the Police Station, Nachna, District Jaisalmer by complainant Oma Ram, who is the brother of deceased Geeta, stating therein that his sister Geeta was married with appellant Jetha Ram in April, 2005 and according to their capacity, dowry has been given at the time of marriage but the present appellant and his parents used to harass the complainant's sister in connection of demand of dowry. Many times, conciliations were'rnade but the situation has never been changed. Five days back Geeta came to the house of her parents but the present appellant took her to in-laws place, where in the presence of Parma Ram, she has been beaten and when Parma Ram was going to inform the incident to the persons of the village, he received a telephone call that Geeta has been died. It has been stated that Geeta's husband, mother-in-law Keku, father-in-law Sona Ram and brother- in-law Deepa Ram have murdered her. On the basis of above report, FIR No.38/ 2008 has been registered and after investigation, charge-sheet has been filed against the present appellant and others for the offences under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC. The case has been committed to the court of Sessions Judge, Jaisalmer. The present appellant and the others have been charged for the offences under Sections 498A and 304B, IPC. Nine witnesses have been examined by the prosecution. The statements of the accused-persons were recorded under Section 313, Cr. PC. and five witnesses have been produced as defence witnesses. After conclusion of the trial, the learned Sessions Judge has convicted the present appellant as above and acquitted the other accused persons from the offence under Sections 498A and 304B, IPC and at the same time, also acquitted the present appellant for the offence under Sections 304B and 498A, IPC. Hence Jetha Ram and State both have preferred these appeals. Heard learned counsel for the appellant and the learned PP and perused the record.
(3.) THE contention of the learned Public Prosecutor is that there is ample evidence on record to prove that the present appellant has given cruel treatment to Geeta. Oma Ram and others witnesses have categorically stated that present appellant and others were in habit of ill-treating Geeta in connection of demand of dowry and specific incidents have been narrated by Oma Ram and PW-4 Parma Ram and other witnesses have also specifically corroborated the prosecution version and hence the present appellant and others should be convicted, for the offence under Sections 498A and 3046, IPC. Per contra, the appellant Jetha Ram has submitted that there are material contradictions in the statements of the witnesses. There is no infirmity in the order of acquittal and at the same time, he has also submitted that, there is no evidence which can show that the present appellant, in any way, abetted or instigated the offence or he committed any cruelty to the deceased and hence he should be acquitted of the offence under Section 306, IPC. To sustain a conviction under Section 304B, IPC, it is necessary that (1) the death has been caused under unnatural circumstances and (2) within a period of 7 years from the marriage and (3) also that it has been shown that soon before her death she was subjected to cruelty or harassment in connection of demand of dowry by husband or his relative. ;